Determination of methylmercury in marine sediment samples: Method validation and occurrence data

• A method for MeHg determination at trace level in marine sediments is completely validated.
• Validation is performed according to ISO-17025 and Eurachem guidelines.
• The extraction efficiency of four sample preparation procedures is evaluated.
• The uncertainty budget is used as a tool for evaluation of main uncertainty contributors.
• Comparison with independent methods yields good agreement within stated uncertainty.

The determination of methylmercury (MeHg) in sediment samples is a difficult task due to the extremely low MeHg/THg (total mercury) ratio and species interconversion. Here, we present the method validation of a cost-effective fit-for-purpose analytical procedure for the measurement of MeHg in sediments, which is based on aqueous phase ethylation, followed by purge and trap and hyphenated gas chromatography–pyrolysis–atomic fluorescence spectrometry (GC–Py–AFS) separation and detection. Four different extraction techniques, namely acid and alkaline leaching followed by solvent extraction and evaporation, microwave-assisted extraction with 2-mercaptoethanol, and acid leaching, solvent extraction and back extraction into sodium thiosulfate, were examined regarding their potential to selectively extract MeHg from estuarine sediment IAEA-405 certified reference material (CRM). The procedure based on acid leaching with HNO3/CuSO4, solvent extraction and back extraction into Na2S2O3 yielded the highest extraction recovery, i.e., 94 ± 3% and offered the possibility to perform the extraction of a large number of samples in a short time, by eliminating the evaporation step. The artifact formation of MeHg was evaluated by high performance liquid chromatography coupled to inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (HPLC–ICP–MS), using isotopically enriched Me201Hg and 202Hg and it was found to be nonexistent. A full validation approach in line with ISO 17025 and Eurachem guidelines was followed. With this in mind, blanks, selectivity, working range (1–800 pg), linearity (0.9995), recovery (94–96%), repeatability (3%), intermediate precision (4%), limit of detection (0.45 pg) and limit of quantification (0.85 pg) were systematically assessed with CRM IAEA-405. The uncertainty budget was calculated and the major contribution to the combined uncertainty (16.24%, k = 2) was found to arise from the uncertainty associated with recovery (74.1%). Demonstration of traceability of measurement results is also presented. The validated measurement procedure was applied to the determination of MeHg incurred in sediments from a highly polluted and scarcely studied area in the Caribbean region.

Figure optionsDownload as PowerPoint slide